My main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are mostly as our platform, control plane, and for VMs.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux for SAP with HA and Update Services 8.8
Amazon Web ServicesExternal reviews
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Consistently reliable platform mitigates downtime and lowers risks
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has helped me mitigate downtime and lower risks. Anyone coming from security will tell you that more patches in a timely manner will save you a lot of time.
What is most valuable?
What I appreciate the most about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is the DNF feature. DNF benefits our company since it's my personal preference; that package manager makes sense to me. I've also used it longer than other ones, which contributes to my familiarity.
Package managers in general are a core component of our operations, keeping our platform clean and running smoothly, and it's essential.
Insights is nice since I get information on my background and security matters, and it's been helpful to have it there as well.
What needs improvement?
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) can be improved regarding security-side integrations that can be tightened with the releasing of images compliant with CIS controls or DISA STIGs, so they're built in and not an extra step.
To make Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a ten out of ten, the best Linux OS solution in the market, the only immediate change that comes to mind is security-related; releasing images available at different security levels would be helpful. If something is locked down to DISA STIG Level two or whatever environment, having that as a baked image to pull down and deploy would save a lot of time for many companies since building that pipeline is difficult and time-consuming.
There's also a limited number of those they'll have to deal with for Red Hat, so it's a lot of work. If they're doing those images for each level for STIG and then CIS, there will be a finite number to go through, and if anyone else needs to tailor them beyond that, then that's on them. It should be pretty small changes; it's kind of locked in.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for seven months.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
My thoughts on the stability and reliability of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) platform are that it has been excellent. When I consider reliability problems we have had and how much relates to RHEL, most of the issues aren't Red Hat-related; something else fails, and the Red Hat side has been consistently reliable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) scales with the growing needs of my company very effectively. My specific team is not on a huge scale right now, however, it's growing quickly, and we haven't had any issues with RHEL so far.
How are customer service and support?
My experience with customer service and technical support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) so far has been really good. I haven't encountered just a create-ticket-get-a-response type of interaction yet since we still have a consultancy going on for different pieces identity management and AAP. That remains to be seen in terms of what it will be when we don't have somebody readily available. So far, the response times and helpful responses have been good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I've used other solutions. The main difference between Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) and the other Linux solutions we use is a level of comfort. I sleep better knowing I have official support and can call someone, or there's probably a consultant or somebody on Red Hat's side ready to help me figure things out. If I'm running a Debian system, I'm really relying on the community, which can take time, and if I'm running something at work on that, then that can hurt.
Regarding usability, I've gravitated towards RPM-based Linux systems in general as I find them more intuitive.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment is super straightforward. We do some environmental stuff, and that gets a little bit trickier based on the core running on top of it.
What about the implementation team?
What was our ROI?
From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is the number of things tied together in a somewhat neat package. There's something to be said for setting up Satellite or the other pieces of the infrastructure, AAP, or whatever it is I'm going to be using, however, all the tie-ins are there, and once I've done some initial footwork, having those things work in tandem and reliably with support on hand when they don't is really helpful.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We consider different solutions while using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Actually, we use a few different Linux OS solutions. There's some Canonical in our environment through VMs, and there are tools particularly suited for deploying on bare metal that we use. So, we have a bit of a mixed environment within Linux.
What other advice do I have?
My upgrade or migration plans to stay current depend on where it's at or the platform team; our stuff is going to be separate, and I'm unsure exactly what the cadence is for release and into the patching cycle. That'll be a pretty quick turnaround. We have situations where it needs to stay on older systems since the team using it needs that to prove out or test whatever they're working on.
On a scale from one to ten, I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) a nine out of ten.
This is one of the best products I’ve used in my entire career
RHEL has been solid in the five years I have experience using it in an Enterprise environment.
easy and reliable use
Great, stable and well documented product
Very stable distro with lots of customization options and almost unlimited customizability for making a custom ISO using anaconda and kickstart files.
Support wise we are not really in need of TAC level assistance very often but on the few times we did I would say that got a bit of mixed feelings with the response time and approach of resolving the issue.
Reliable and easy to get support
For a developer who doesn't get to use Linux all of the time, it's a great time saver. There is readily available documentation.
Easy to install as it is the de-facto standard. Doesn't take long to get it up and working.
RHEL
RedHat Summit Review
enterprise
Reliable performance reduces troubleshooting time, allowing focus on new projects
What is our primary use case?
Our main use cases for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are to host Java enterprise applications and middleware.
What is most valuable?
The feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is that it is solid and reliable. This solid and reliable performance helps our company as it makes it less problematic to troubleshoot issues; things just run and I don't have to be involved every day. If it runs smoothly, then we move onto other projects, but if it's wavy and bumpy, we have to pause and address the issues.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is a great product, and we don't have any major pain points.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) definitely helps to mitigate downtime; we reboot our servers twice a year and do our patches, and that helps reduce our risk of exposure to malware, worms, viruses, but also increases our uptime. My upgrade plans for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) to stay current include going to the website for RHEL 10; it has a lot of new features. I'll have to work with the server team to see if they're ready for it since it's a big jump.
What needs improvement?
I'm not really sure what I would like to see more of from Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).
Customer service and technical support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is an area they could improve.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) at my company since 2007.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability and reliability of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) have been great; we never have to reboot unless it's scheduled.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) scales very efficiently. We're able to add CPUs as needed and add memory, and we're really happy with our Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).
How are customer service and support?
Customer service and technical support needs work.
We submit an issue to them and go back and forth for three or four days just defining the issue so they understand the problem. That's frustrating when it could be solved in a 20-minute phone call; they just don't do that, it's just back-and-forth emails.
I would rate the customer service and technical support a six out of ten.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I don't really have much to compare to, as Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is the only Linux that we've used.
How was the initial setup?
I'm not too involved in deploying it. We just mainly use it.
I have been involved in the upgrade of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as we upgraded from 8 to 9 a couple years ago.
What was our ROI?
For me, the biggest return on investment when using Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is having something that is widely supported; it's not a one-off that you have to hope there's support for. There's definitely support for it, and the Red Hat people are always good to deal with.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Another department takes care of the pricing, setup costs, and licensing for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I'm not aware of the licensing costs, but they seem to set our new systems up pretty quickly, so I'm overall happy with that.
What other advice do I have?
On a scale of one to ten, I rate this solution a nine.